Story of Jesus Essays

Story of Jesus Essays Story of Jesus Essay Story of Jesus Essay In some cases Watson considers Paines argument good for nothing (Apology, 120). Paine compares the genealogies of Christ given at the beginning of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and having found a difference, he concludes that one of them lies and so if they cannot be believed in the very first part of their writing, then nothing that they say afterwards is to be believed (Apology, 121). In Watsons opinion, neither Paines premises nor his conclusion are admissible, since it is unfair to reject all the accounts of the Gospel, saying that the evangelists differ in writing a pedigree of thousands of years ago. Again Watson reasons out that two persons may write a genealogy of a certain individual based on different sources they find without the least intention to write a falsehood. Likewise, Matthew and Luke took their accounts from the public registers and wrote differently; Matthew followed the genealogy of Joseph (Jesus stepfather), and Luke the genealogy of Mary (Jesus mother). Had not their account been true, they would have been exposed by the Jews for having imposed a false genealogy on the Jewish nation (Apology, 122). Watson observes that Paine reads the Bible with a critical eye, pointing out what he thinks as an error, and disowns its moral and historical significance. The ongoing issues indicate that Paines and Watsons contrary views resulted from the 18th century modern biblical criticism, which emphasized fact, discarding the value of faith.16 Paine got used to this method while Watson stuck to Biblical authority. Their difference can be seen in their understanding of truth. What Watson regards as truth appears to be a myth for Paine. Their attitudes towards miracles can be mentioned as an example here. Paine asserts that the miracles cited by Josephus, i.e. opening the sea of Pamphlilia to let Alexander and his army pass is related to the division of the Red Sea narrated in Exodus. Also the two miracles, curing a layman and a blind man which Tacitus relates with Vespasian are synonymous to the miracles told of Jesus Christ by his historians.17 All these miracles are not acceptable to Paine because they sound naturally incredible. Responding to Paine, Watson argues that the miracles recorded in the Bible are the works of God, and therefore superior to those mentioned by Tacitus (Apology, 22). While Paine views the Biblical miracles as mere fables, Watson values them as supernatural acts whose validity cannot be doubted. Taking seriously the sort of contradictions he found in the Gospels, Paine rejects the whole story of Jesus (his virgin birth, crucifixion, and resurrection), considering them as myths derived from heathen mythology.18 Conversely, based on his inference that whenever two individuals write about somebodys story there may be a disagreement in minute points, Watson does not hesitate to accept the story of Jesus Christ as true. Once he is convinced that Christs birth and resurrection are miraculous in their nature, and the testimonies of the Gospels are deemed to be reliable source of divine inspiration, he does not leave any room in his mind to suspect the reality of the biography of Jesus. As a deist, Paine does not accept anything that is opposed to his own experience. But Watsons attitude towards things contrary to his experience is quite different from Paines. Watson states, my philosophy does not teach me to reject every testimony which is opposite to my experience (Apology, 48). The variation of their stand can be seen in the account of the standing still of the sun mentioned in the book of Joshua on which both of them commented. Paine contemptuously rejects the story as a tale only fit to amuse children.19 According to him, God works constantly through the universe, and so extraordinary accounts like the story in the book of Joshua are against Gods law. Defending the validity of the story, Watson brings proof from tradition. As stated by one of the ancient historian, in the time of Ahaz, the sun went back ten degrees. Also Herodotus said, the Egyptian priests told me that the sun had four times deviated from his course, having twice risen where it uniformly goes down and twice gone down where he uniformly rises (Apology, 52). In addition to this, as Joshua himself quoted (Josh. 10: 13), the miracle of the suns standing still was recorded in the book of Jasher. Therefore the testimony of tradition is enough for Watson to accept such a story which has never happened in his lifetime. Furthermore, as a believer in the supernatural deeds of God, Watson grounds his acceptance of the miracle in the book of Joshua on his conviction that the machine of the universe is in the hand of God; he can stop the motion of any part, or of the whole of it, with less trouble and less danger of injuring it than one can stop his watch (Apology, 53). Therefore, contrary to Paine, Watson emphasizes Gods freedom of action, asserting that he can do whatever he likes on the universe. The difference of opinion between Paine and Watson can also be traced out from their treatment of prophecies. According to Paine, prophets are impostures and fortunetellers whose prophecies can have no greater avail than poems and music (Apology, 58). As for Watson, the prophets were divinely inspired to declare Gods will in various manners and degrees of evidence as best suited the occasion and time (Apology, 59). It is true that the prophets are fallible in their nature. But according to Watson, they are not fallible while they are professing to deliver the word of God (Apology, 59). Thus their prophecies are deemed to be real predictions, though expressed in poetic language, and their fulfillment approves the truth of revelation. Paine points out contradictions in the Bible to which Watson replied, appealing to the text. Paine contends that the reason given for the observation of Sabbath in the book of Deuteronomy is different from that of Exodus (Apology, 31). In effect, he invalidates the authority of both books. In his reply, Watson states that as its name Deuteronomy  (a repetition of a law) indicates, the law which had been given to the Israelites was repeated to their children 40 years later because Moses their leader was soon to be taken and they were to settle in the midst of idolatrous nations. Thus, for Watson, it is not surprising if some additions and variations appear when a legislator thought fit to republish it many years later its first promulgation (Apology, 32). Paine also investigated the Gospels and found some accounts mentioned by one evangelist, which are not mentioned by all or by any of the others, and deduced that the gospels are not the works of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (Apology, 125). For Watson the reverse is true. He infers that all the evangelists agree in a great many particulars of the life of Jesus: purity of his manners, publicity of his miracles, the manner of his death and resurrection. Hence, while they agree in these great points, Watson goes on, their disagreement in points of little consequence is rather a confirmation of the truth than an indication of the falsehood of their several accounts, because had they agreed in nothing, their testimony ought to have been rejected as a legendary tale, and had they agreed in everything it might have been suspected that they were a set of imposters (Apology, 125).